Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider
registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.

2. One of Trump's earliest campaign aides tried to educate the candidate about the Constitution, but Trump grew too bored to make it past the Fourth Amendment:

"Early in the campaign, Sam Nunberg was sent to explain the Constitution to the candidate. 'I got as far as the Fourth Amendment," Nunberg recalled, "before his finger is pulling down on his lip and his eyes are rolling back in his head.'"

8. Wolff reports that a spokesman for Trump's legal team left the job because he feared possible obstruction of justice related to a statement drafted aboard Air Force One that defended Donald Trump Jr.'s meeting with a Russian lawyer in June 2016.

"Mark Corallo was instructed not to speak to the press, indeed not to even answer his phone. Later that week, Corallo, seeing no good outcome-and privately confiding that he believed the meeting on Air Force One represented a likely obstruction of justice-quit. (The Jarvanka side would put it out that Corallo was fired.)"

'dope.' The list went on."

10. Wolff also writes at length about former Goldman Sachs executive Gary Cohn, who leads the president's National Economic Council. Cohn has privately disagreed with Trump a number of times in the past year. But an April email that, Wolff writes, circulated around the White House "purporting to represent the views of Gary Cohn" takes this to a new level:

"It's worse than you can imagine. An idiot surrounded by clowns. Trump won't read anything - not one-page memos, not the brief policy papers; nothing. He gets up halfway through meetings with world leaders because he is bored. And his staff is no better. Kushner is an entitled baby who knows nothing. Bannon is an arrogant prick who thinks he's smarter than he is. Trump is less a person than a collection of terrible traits. No one will survive the first year but his family. I hate the work, but feel I need to stay because I'm the only person there with a clue what he's doing. The reason so few jobs have been filled is that they only accept people who pass ridiculous purity tests, even for midlevel policy-making jobs where the people will never see the light of day. I am in a constant state of shock and horror."

If Bannon really wanted to cut up Trump, and if he really had evidence (instead of hyperbole and insults) he would have picked up the phone and called the FBI. Instead we're to believe there's something actionable, but he decided to hold off and publish it in a book months later. Nah, he's full of **** as usual.

Someone else (not Bannon) quotes Bannon in their book talking about insider stuff that went on in the first chunk of Trump's Presidency and it's Bannon who is going after Trump now? Huh? I think that you, and probably a bunch of other people, likely including Trump, are a bit confused.

I always wondered how that alliance even came to be. Bannon is antiestablishment, and Trump is pretty much the poster child for The Man. (OK, OK... I need to work on that metaphor)

I keep circling back to the theory that Trump did not want or expect to win... that the future of Trump Media was to be raking it in as a rightwing blowhard on extensive platforms (such as Brietbart, FoxNews, perhaps his own channels) until he had so many strokes his speech was incomprehensible.

Then, uhoh, he's president. Trump's ambition went from paying off his debt with radio op/eds to plans for the first American monarchy. Bannon's dream of partnering up with a cash cow was shattered by waking up one morning as the Little People, and maybe especially Bannon getting the boot because he's not on board with that whole oligarchy thing.

I more and more am leaning to believe that almost everyone wanted Trump to lose. Obviously, the Clinton campaign did, but I think Donald and many on his campaign didn't really want him to be President. The claim that Trump was running to strengthen his brand and pave the way for a Trump Network is very plausible. It's always easier to criticize from the outside than have to put up or shut up. That's what he really wanted to do.

Someone else (not Bannon) quotes Bannon in their book talking about insider stuff that went on in the first chunk of Trump's Presidency and it's Bannon who is going after Trump now? Huh? I think that you, and probably a bunch of other people, likely including Trump, are a bit confused.

Of course, I could just be missing important information here, too.

The reason I think Bannon is at least complicit is - ignoring the fact that he probably did say exactly that - in addition Brietbart is all over this, and that's Bannon's work.

Eta 2: How does one cease and desist what has been said to the author of a book?

I'd have to read the details about why it's a cease and desist, but it's likely because Bannon has not denied the accusation, and seems to be pushing the quote on Brietbart. I would not be surprised if there is a parallel request for injunction against sales of the book.

It's not the translation, it's the pronunciation. 'ei' sounds like 'eye' (eg wine is wein) / 'ie' sounds like 'ee'

(German was technically my first language, but I left Europe as a child, so a bit wobbly on dialect... but the ei/ie pronunciation rule about hearing the 2nd letter is pretty consistent)

It's consistent auf Deutsch, but in English if it's a word you're unfamiliar with, pronunciation of ei/ie is pretty much a crap-shoot.

__________________"There's vastly more truth to be found in rocks than in holy books. Rocks are far superior, in fact, because you can DEMONSTRATE the truth found in rocks. Plus, they're pretty. Holy books are just heavy." - Dinwar

Stephen K. Bannon's main financial backer is formally cutting ties with the former Trump adviser.

In a new statement Thursday, billionaire conservative donor Rebekah Mercer said that she has not spoken to Bannon, the former White House chief strategist, in many months and that she continues to support President Trump.

...
People familiar with the conservative news website said discussions have begun at the organization about potentially removing him from the perch that propelled him to them forefront of national conservative politics.

The special counsel has received handwritten notes from Mr. Trump’s former chief of staff, Reince Priebus, showing that Mr. Trump talked to Mr. Priebus about how he had called Mr. Comey to urge him to say publicly that he was not under investigation. The president’s determination to fire Mr. Comey even led one White House lawyer to take the extraordinary step of misleading Mr. Trump about whether he had the authority to remove him.

The New York Times has also learned that four days before Mr. Comey was fired, one of Mr. Sessions’s aides asked a congressional staff member whether he had damaging information about Mr. Comey, part of an apparent effort to undermine the F.B.I. director. It was not clear whether Mr. Mueller’s investigators knew about this incident.

Mr. Mueller has also been examining a false statement that the president dictated on Air Force One in July in response to an article in The Times about a meeting that Trump campaign officials had with Russians in 2016. A new book, “Fire and Fury: Inside the Trump White House,” by Michael Wolff, says that the president’s lawyers believed that the statement was “an explicit attempt to throw sand into the investigation’s gears,” and that it led one of Mr. Trump’s spokesmen to quit because he believed it was obstruction of justice.

President Trump gave firm instructions in March to the White House’s top lawyer: stop the attorney general, Jeff Sessions, from recusing himself in the Justice Department’s investigation into whether Mr. Trump’s associates had helped a Russian campaign to disrupt the 2016 election.

...

Mr. McGahn was unsuccessful, and the president erupted in anger in front of numerous White House officials, saying he needed his attorney general to protect him.

President Trump gave firm instructions in March to the White House’s top lawyer: stop the attorney general, Jeff Sessions, from recusing himself in the Justice Department’s investigation into whether Mr. Trump’s associates had helped a Russian campaign to disrupt the 2016 election.

...

Mr. McGahn was unsuccessful, and the president erupted in anger in front of numerous White House officials, saying he needed his attorney general to protect him.

It's clear after years of bribing state AGs that Trump simply thinks that's how one handles these legal matters.

Trump sees the AG's principal task as being to seemingly literally protect the prez. He invokes Bobby Kennedy (for brother Jack) and Eric Holder (for Obama) as examples. Yet one example of so many evidencing an ocean of ignorance and hence his unfitness to serve from the standpoint of both basic knowledge of job requirements and ability/willingness to freaking *learn* anything.

I mean, the job requirements for a burger flipper at Mickey D's are more stringently imposed. The here demonstrated virtually complete inversion of level of qualification for a position with respect to supposed responsibility and import is breathless to behold so nakedly made apparent. And the difficulty of imposition of sanctions--even censure--when the political factors conspire against such is dismaying, to say the least. Boy, when it's said "anyone" can become president, at least that part of the social contract is pretty near 100% true--when a critical mass of credulous dupes have a say.

The reason I think Bannon is at least complicit is - ignoring the fact that he probably did say exactly that - in addition Brietbart is all over this, and that's Bannon's work.

I'd agree that he probably did say it. Breitbart would probably be pointedly refuting it if it was false and it's hardly something that would be surprising in the first place, given how badly Jr and co messed up. I'd withhold judgement on whether Bannon is directly complicit, though, until there's something more clear to work with. It's looking like Trump's the only one of the two actually attacking the other, either way.

__________________All national institutions of churches, whether Jewish, Christian or Turkish, appear to me no other than human inventions, set up to terrify and enslave mankind, and monopolize power & profit - Thomas Paine

That's easy to admit. But would you cry if he were assassinated? Or if his presidency would have been prevented by the machinations of the Russiagate hoaxers? I don't think so, and as I said earlier I think the latter is the reason why your buddies don't even acknowledge the by now obvious hoax. Well, the several investigations do, and January will be a busy month:

That's easy to admit. But would you cry if he were assassinated? Or if his presidency would have been prevented by the machinations of the Russiagate hoaxers? I don't think so, and as I said earlier I think the latter is the reason why your buddies don't even acknowledge the by now obvious hoax. Well, the several investigations do, and January will be a busy month:

That's easy to admit. But would you cry if he were assassinated? Or if his presidency would have been prevented by the machinations of the Russiagate hoaxers? I don't think so, and as I said earlier I think the latter is the reason why your buddies don't even acknowledge the by now obvious hoax. Well, the several investigations do, and January will be a busy month:

That's easy to admit. But would you cry if he were assassinated? Or if his presidency would have been prevented by the machinations of the Russiagate hoaxers? I don't think so, and as I said earlier I think the latter is the reason why your buddies don't even acknowledge the by now obvious hoax. Well, the several investigations do, and January will be a busy month:

Listening to Rep Jim Jordan, Republican from Ohio try to talk over Katy Tur is lalalalala I can't hear you insanity.

He can't let go of the GOP talking points trying to discredit the dossier.

Paraphrasing:
Jordan: Papdopolous was a coffee boy mouthing off in a bar, that's ridiculous it could lead to a FISA warrant
Tur: How did he know about the stolen emails?
Jordan: Repeats his talking points
Tur: Keeps trying
Jordan: Keeps repeating
Tur: I love having you on but I wish you would actually answer my questions.

Do these guys know they are lying? Or are they unconsciously
blocking inconvenient facts and sticking to the narrative they like?

__________________On 22 JUL 2016, Candidate Donald Trump in his acceptance speech: "There can be no prosperity without law and order."
On 05 FEB 2019, President Donald Trump said in his Sate of the Union Address: "If there is going to be peace and legislation, there cannot be war and investigation."
On 15 FEB 2019 BobTheCoward said: "I constantly assert I am a fool."
A man's best friend is his dogma.

Listening to Rep Jim Jordan, Republican from Ohio try to talk over Katy Tur is lalalalala I can't hear you insanity.

He can't let go of the GOP talking points trying to discredit the dossier.

Paraphrasing:
Jordan: Papdopolous was a coffee boy mouthing off in a bar, that's ridiculous it could lead to a FISA warrant
Tur: How did he know about the stolen emails?
Jordan: Repeats his talking points
Tur: Keeps trying
Jordan: Keeps repeating
Tur: I love having you on but I wish you would actually answer my questions.

Do these guys know they are lying? Or are they unconsciously
blocking inconvenient facts and sticking to the narrative they like?

Same mouthpiece, Jordan, is now on Meet the Press. Chuck Todd lets him repeat his entire propaganda speech. Todd asks a couple questions that challenge the bull **** being spewed: Clinton's emails, the FBI is biased for Clinton, why is no one investigating Clinton's collusion....

Interesting to compare Tur to Todd. Tur and Jordan talked over each other through much of the interview because she wasn't letting him repeat his lies without being challenged. Todd let Jordan get the whole spiel out and only spoke up in between. Yes Todd's questions properly challenged some of Jordan's key points. But he let Jordan get a ton of falsehoods out without anything countering it. And of course, Tur, being female (they get no respect) couldn't cut the guy off the way Chris Matthews does.

Also of note, Jordan had a hard time keeping a straight face. Not sure if that was on camera nervousness or hard-to-keep-a-straight-face lying.

The propaganda being spewed by this crowd wouldn't be so bad if it was contained to Limbaugh's and Jone's talk radio shows. But this is mainstream Congress repeating the most far-fetched CTs on the mainstream news.

There's a whole different quality to this from the usual political talking points ignoring global warming and financial facts, throwing snowballs in Congress, and pretending they are benefitting the poor by cutting all the social safety nets.

But this other stuff, it's not alternative reality, it's downright dangerous propaganda alt-reality.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.